User talk:David Falkayn
-- 03:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC) Character template Please remember to use the standard character template when adding characters. Thank you. -- 19:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the resume, but... ...I neither asked for credentials, nor do I care about them. You asked for clarification of the copyedit tag, you got it. Honestly, your tone was accusatory from the start, and any perceived "discourtesy" in my first reply was just that, perceived. Many editors here are, in fact, in high school or college. Ultimately, it doesn't matter if you're not one of them. Whether you're a professor or postal worker, fifteen or fifty, you will impress no one here by throwing your theoretical weight around. So go put some salve on your needlessly-bruised ego, and show your maturity by moving on, Professor. --TimPendragon 04:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC) Removing red links idea The way you suggested is fine. Instead of using the United Trek fan fiction universe article you could have individual articles that cover specific areas (places, ships, characters, etc) such as Star Trek: Distant Horizons: People does. It will keep the United Trek page from getting too long. Also just a reminder, don't forget to sign any posts you make on talk pages. - 04:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC) Okay, I get it now... ...One particular user makes a broad generalization which you feel casts aspersions on your work, and instead of discussing it with that person, you take out your frustrations on other users. Well... sigh. Now that's cleared up, let me say that no one is a perfect editor, certainly not me. But no one is being singled out. ''Many'' articles are tagged for copyediting, some with comments, some without. Usually, when that tag is placed on an article, something is so glaringly wrong that comment is unnecessary. Yours was tagged primarily for wikification. I was in the middle of another project, noticed and tagged the article, intending to come back to it when I had time, if someone else didn't beat me to the punch. In any event, you should assume good faith. No one, certainly no admin or experienced user, is going to slap an edit or deletion template on an article simply because they don't like it. --TimPendragon 05:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC) :What, exactly, do you feel I'm missing? I think I've explained myself, and unless you feel you're owed an apology, I'm not sure what more you want from me. Please, feel free to illumine my understanding. --TimPendragon 05:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC) :And, for the record, there is no personal component whatsoever to my issues with you tonight. I have no grudge, no vendetta, nor am I fighting anyone else's battles. If I appear to be a cold bastard, well, I'm the same with everyone. --TimPendragon 05:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC) Well... ...As for tonight, I think I've explained my actions ad nauseam. Frankly, I don't see how tagging one article without comment - when the need for wikification should have been apparent - constitutes poor communication. However, for the future, rest assured that should I tag or otherwise edit one of your articles, you'll know why. Furthermore, rest assured that any further "discourtesy" on my part will only be proportionate to "pompousness" (your word, not mine) on yours. Satisfactory?--TimPendragon 06:14, 27 December 2007 (UTC) United Trek group If you and the other authors think it is a good idea I have no objections to joining the yahoo group. - 07:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)